MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493482697 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2005v30n4a1525

Data Mining the Kids: Surveillance and Market Research Strategies in Children’s Online Games

2006· article· en· W1493482697 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetAggregate dataRelation (database)Internet privacyBusinessAdvertisingMarketingPersonally identifiable informationInformation sensitivityAggregate (composite)Data sciencePublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebComputer securityData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores privacy issues in relation to the growing prominence of marketing research and data mining in websites for children. Whereas increasing protection is given to individuals’ personal information, little attention is paid to information that is aggregated, electronically scanned, and sorted—despite the fact that aggregate information is often highly valued by the marketing industry. The authors review current trends in Internet market research, data mining techniques, policy initiatives, and the contents of some of the most highly frequented children’s game sites. The paper demonstrates how common data mining practices constitute a threat to children’s emerging rights online.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it